A Proposed Definition of Standard of Living

Author(s): Howard R. Cottam and A. R. Mangus

Source: Social Forces, Vol. 21, No. 2 (Dec., 1942), pp. 177-179
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2570553 .
Accessed: 14/06/2014 14:43

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Social Forces.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.81 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:43:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TEACHING AND RESEARCH 177

A PROPOSED DEFINITION OF STANDARD OF LIVING'

HOWARD R. COTTAM AND A. R. MANGUS
PennsylvaniaStateCollegeand OhioState University

N O CURREN-Tdefinition of standard of Similarly, the place of habits and customs as a

living is wholly acceptable to social part of standard of living is implied in the work
scientists. To certain writers it means of W. G. Sumner and A. G. Keller.5 E. A. Ross
one of several forms of specific behavior while to used the words standards and folkways synony-
others it includes broad patterns of living. While mously.6 Anieffort was made by E. L. Kirkpatrick
certain definitions refer to consumption of ma- to clarify the concept by adding mnodifyingadjec-
terial goods, others emphasize satisfactions. A tives to differentiate between prevailing and
widely accepted definition is that of Faith M. desired standards of living.7
Williams who regards standard of living as Perhaps the most inclusive definition is that of
an ideal or norm of consumption" which may be Carle C. Zimmerman who writes that standard of
described " . . . in terms of goods and services of living " . . . is the type of behavior which most
a specific quantity and quality."2 To Elizabeth adequately expresses the dominant values found
Ellis Hoyt, stanidardof living refers to " . . . more in the associated manner of living." Standard of
than material things consumed . . . a sum total, living is a species of his systems of living, which he
not of things, but of satisfactions."3 The impor- defines as " . . . the total individual and group
tance of social values, attitudes, and habits as a behavior as it is integrated about the efforts to
part of standard of living is emphasized by Thomas satisfy desires."18 This definition which empha-
D. Eliot who believes that the concept" ... refers sizes behavior is called by Zimmerman a "typo-
sometimes to the actual distribution of real income logical" definition. He classifies other definitions
in goods, services, and advantages received. In as either "attitudinal"-those dealing with satis-
other connections it means rather a set of habitual factions, or "scientific"-those referring to scien-
valuations,-of attitudes of insistence toward tific norms. Hazel Kyrk speaks of maannersand
certain goods and services and advantages."4 modes of livinig as expressing the dominant values
1 The definition stated in this article was used as a
of persons and groups.9 L. L. Bernard reserves
frame of reference for the operational definitions of level the term standard
to apply to " ... an ideal or
of living, social participation and social adjustment scienti'fically constructed scale of expenditures. . .
used in the research described in the following reports: worked out as a means to aln approved social
A. R. Mangus and Howard R. Cottam, Level of Living, end."'0 Included in many studies of standard of
Social Participation, and Adjustment of Ohtio Farm living are inventories of possessions. The term
People, The Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station, socioeconomticstatus which is a related concept of
Bulletini No. 624 (1941); Howard R. Cottam, Methods standard of living, is defined by F. S. Chapin as
of MeasutringLevel of Living, Social Participation, and the position an individual or a family oc-
Adjustment of Ohio FarmzPeople, Department of Rural with reference to the prevailing average
cupies
Economics and Rural Sociology, The Ohio State Uni-
versity, Mimeographed Bulletin No. 139 (1941);
standards of cultural possessions, effective income,
Howard R. Cottam, Level of Living, Social Participa- material possessions, and participation in group
tion, and Social Adjustment: A Study of the Standards activities of the community."'" Many investi-
of Living of 299 Ohio Farm Families, unpublished
Ph. D. Thesis (Ulniversity of Wisconsin, 1940). 5 The Science of Society (New IHaven, 1927), 71-79
2 Faith M. Williams and Carle C. Zimmerman, Printciples of Sociology (New York, 1931), chlap. 51-
Stuidiesof FaminlyLiving in the United States and Other 7 The Farmner'sStandard of Living (New York, 1929),
Countries: An Analysis of Material and Mfethod,United 9-28.
8 Consumption an-d Standards of Living (New York,
States Department of Agriculture, Miscellaneous
Publication No. 223 (1935), 4. 1936), 3 and 6.
3 The Consunmptionof Wealth7, (New York, 1928), 'A Theory of Consumption (Boston, 1923), 232-233.
242, and Consumiptionin Our Society (New York, 1938), 10"Standards and Planes of Livin.," Social Forces
266. (Dec., 1928), 190.
4 American Stanldardsand Planes of Living (Chicago, 11Contemporary A mnericanInistituitions (New York,
1931), 1. 1935), 374.

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.81 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:43:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
178 SOCIAL FORCES

gators consider participation in social groups an STANDARDS AS BEHAVIOR

aspect of the concept.'2 Implicit in the verb "living" is activity of some
While the term standard of living may be used sort. Most of the currently accepted viewpoints
to designate any of several specific factors it may of the concept either imply or denote explicitly
also be used as a generic term embracing many human behavior, but many of the studies in the
specific types of behavior and emphasizing their field of standard of living research give the impres-
interrelatedness. In this article the concept is sion that goods, services or statuses rather than
broadly defined as a theoretical frame of reference the activities engaged in to acquire and to use them
for the subsequent development of more specific are the basic elements of the concept. From the
concepts. standpoint of the present research, goods, services
DEFINITION
or statuses are not per se objects for study; the
meanings of these objects are fundamental ele-
The standard of living of a group consists of the ments for study. Much behavior, however, can
types of human activity common to a group which not be observed directly and must be imputed
are in harmony with cultural requirements which from presence or absence of various criteria.
most completely meet the biological urges and Narrowly conceived, behavior is defined in
social goals of individual members. The most terms of observable activities, but equally impor-
common forms of behavior through which human tant is the behavior which occurs on a covert
needs or interests may be satisfied are generalized (anticipatory or retrospective) level. Particular
into group standards of living. Each group has types of covert behavior have been classified in
its common forms of behavior or standards and an elaborate but overlapping and inexhaustive
larger groups encompass, in broader generaliza- conceptual framework. The nomenclature is
tions, the standards of component groups.13 confused, and some of the more common terms
Standards of living of a community include the such as values, attitudes, interests, needs, wants,
standards of many families, neighborhoods, wishes, desires, and satisfactions, are used indis-
churches, lodges, and other component groups. criminately. Although no widely acceptable class-
Regional standards are more broadly generalized ification of social purposes, goals or objectives has
to include many communities and American stand- been prepared, there is substantial agreement
ards of living are still more inclusive. This view- among social scientists that there are such values.
point implies the existence of fewer representative The important point here is not the classification
types of behavior in complex groups than in simple of the goals, but the recognition that such values
ones. American standards, in so far as they can grow out of social experience and become the ob-
be identified, can be described only in terms of jectives about which individuals organize their
behavior which is common throughout the nation, lives.
such as monogamy in marriage. In certain reli-
gious groups more specific standards may be identi- CULTURE AND STANDARDS
fied such as marriage by a clergyman and absence Man is not wholly intelligent or utilitarian.
of birth control. Standards of particular families He may act on the basis of motives he does not
may be typified by many specific forms of be- understand and for aims of which he is not fully
havior. The more homogeneous the group the aware. It is assumed in this paper that behavior
wider is the range of behavior that is common to of an individual is largely habitual, yet many of
the group. Standard of living is here defined in these habits have been determined by the culture.
terms of configurations of behavior rather than Patterns of activity favorable to satisfaction of
Utopian ideals. If cannibalism, nudism, or needs are passed on from one generation to the
atheism are common to a particular group they are next and serve as fundamental guides for individual
aspects of the standards of living of that group. behavior. In the American way of life, for exam-
12Nearly 150 studies of family living reviewed by ple, monogamy in marriage, democracy in govern-
ment, and public education are recognized guide-
Faith M. Williams and Carle C. Zimmerman, op. cit.,
456-609, included information on formal social par- posts for individual behavior. Certain groups
ticipation. within America emphasize some of these more than
13 Unique or contradictory behavior may exist but do others. Such ideals or norms are not wholly
the common forms are the "standards." determinative of individual behavior, however,

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.81 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:43:02 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 TEACHINGAND RESEARCH
for particularacts are carriedout partly in response
to the person's conception of the particular situa-
tion confronting him. Moreover, the culture
allows persons many alternative ways of behaving
to achieve the purposes implied in culture norms.
In American culture all persons are expected to
live in houses and to wear clothes, but the in-
dividual has wide latitude in choosing the kind of
house he will occupy and the kind of clothes he
will wear. He is also allowed choice in meeting
other social aims by playing social roles through
occupations, and by participating in various ways
in social groups. Each person may decide, within
certain limits, which roles are most congenial to
his nature.
It must be emphasized that standards of living
are social phenomena. Persons do not exist apart
from the social groups in which they live. A way
of living considered satisfying to a particular
individual may be disapproved by the group and
out of harmony with social standards and socially
sanctioned modes of behavior. The criminal, the
pauper, and ne'er-do-well, the hobo, indicate a few
roles or ways of living that depart from cultural
standards and are socially disapproved regardless
of how much satisfaction the particular individual
might derive from them. Similarly, the saint, the
reformer, or the scientist may not live in full
harmony with cultural standards.
HIGH AND LOW STANDARDS
The definition given above is normative, but it
does not preclude the use of evaluations of stand-
ards as referencepoints for analysis. For example,
"Scientific" standards may be determined as goals,
and those which approach these standards may be
called "high." From another viewpoint "high"
standards of individuals or groups may be consid-
ered as those which conform most closely to norms
This content downloaded from 195.34.78.81 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 14:43:02 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
179
of larger groups or cultures. Viewed in this man-
ner persons who adjust to their social environment
in such a way that their personal needs are satisfied
without departing too far from group standards of
behavior are achieving a maximum standard of
living. Theirs is the "highest" standard of living.
Such persons are characterized by minimum
frustration and maximum contentment; their
biological needs are met on continuing bases; their
imperious cultural wants are satisfied with facility;
and their social goals are achieved through the
roles they play. They are not without degrees of
mental or emotional conflict, but their adjustment
to conflicts is made with relative ease.
SUMMARY OF DEFINITION
Standards of living consist of forms of behavior
which are common to a group and which conform
to cultural norms. Both observable activities
and subjective goals or attitudes are embraced in
the concept. It implies a configuration of social
activity which characterizes the group. Some
forms of behavior may be observed directly; some
activity can only be imputed from possession of
goods, services, or statuses; and covert behavior
can only be inferred through expressions, gestures,
or possessions.
This definition does not deny the existence of
inconsistencies in behavior, but it emphasizes a
high degree of relatedness of behavior. Standard
of living is not a congeries of random behavior of
isolated individuals. Nor may standards be un-
derstood in terms of man's overt activities alone;
they must be related to the adequacy (the com-
pleteness) with which these activities serve him in
the realization of human values. The meaning of
these instruments to individuals together with the
overt behavior involved in their acquisition and
use determine standard of living.